Dress Tartans are they woman's clothes?

[James]

Oh dear, this does get complex: it might be better to forget dancers-arisaids and the like, and rather look at the comparison between formal white tie & tails dressing and a lounge suit.

The first being suitable for formal/dress occasions and the other for at best demi formal and work.

Reverting to the tartan, the dress is as with the white tie suitable for formal/dress occasions; whilst the more sombre hunting for the demi formal and work, or on the hill.

The brighter tartan obviously has an attraction for dancers and the like, for it is more showy: however whilst many dancers are female and so looking to the dress tartan, it would be entirely wrong to suggest that such a tartan is a female preserve.

Oddly the dress tartan to which I'm entitled has no white in it at all-yet the hunting and the chief's personal tartans both have an element of white.

However all the above is really nit picking and of scant interest: for there is something much more important to be considered.

Highland dress can be seen in two categories: the obvious day to day one-where in most case the hunting tartan is appropriate.

However there is the second category, where it is dramatic and to some eyes over the top: however it is not about being reticent, rather it is about very masculine display. At on extreme complete with such things as the dirk and so on, and as a part of that display the brighter dress tartan certainly has a role to play. For the wearer is assuming a real 'spit in your eye' role as a man, and one not ashamed of parading their masculinity: as they strut in their full finery.

Shock horror-I envisage readers wondering when in this day and age a man might behave in such a way?

Here I would mention the USMC Dress Uniform with all the accoutrments-medals etc: or what about our own heritage-were the clansmen of old shy and retiring, or modest in their dress: need I write more.

So I would sugges that rather than run away from the dress tartans, we lay a clear claim to them as is our right: and when the occasion demands we wear them with all the pride and display that is warranted by our heritage.

Or are we wimps to lose yet another bit of our masculinity: as appears to be happening with the claybeg, dirk and skean dhu.

Sorry to rant, but if we are to claim our highland heritage-and note I say highland: we have to accept the whole package, and not just bits of it. To picking up from another thread, it is that bold heritage which makes the difference between a kilt and a skirt.

James

[macwilkin]

I tend to agree with Matt's last post about "dress tartan"; one other factor that could be considered is precedent: in other words, if the clan whose tartan you are wearing has a Chief, which tartan does he/she prefer.

My chief, Sir Alistair Gordon Cumming, prefers the Cumming Hunting tartan in "ancient" colours. The Chief of the Campbells, The Duke of Argyll, prefers the "Old Campbell" tartan, which is essentially the Government Sett.

For some, this may not be an important factor, and I am certainly not suggesting that everyone follow it -- just bringing up another option.

Generally, I think most folks think of "dress" tartans as those that are brighter in colour, like the reds, but one factor that must be mentioned is the whole colour scheme issue: modern, ancient, weathered, etc.

The Cumming Hunting tartan, for example, in the "ancient" colour scheme, is much brighter (with a great deal of Orange-red) than the Cumming Hunting in "modern" colours. It does not look like a hunting tartan per se, even though it does have green as it's base colour.

Interesting discussion, though!

Cheers,

Todd

[Kilted_John]

Another non-white "dress" tartan is the Dress MacLachlan, which happens to belong to my clan... It's yellow and black. Since I don't really care for red tartans, when I finally do get my clan kilt, it will be in said dress tartan.
-J